Universe at War ... can you say sleeper hit ?

Zenoth

Diamond Member
Jan 29, 2005
5,189
184
106
Well I'm back from playing Universe at War: Earth Assault since the past four hours, non-stop.

It just so totally surprised me.

But yes really I am. I didn't expect such a fun game. It's a sleeper hit to me, because when I first saw the trailer I told myself "alright, fancy presentation, perhaps a decent story made out of déjà-vue science-fiction context (aliens wishing Earth is no more, yet again), and those guys made Star Wars: Empire at War, which wasn't necessarily very bad but nothing very addictive either". And I took a chance, yes I bought it out of nowhere, glancing at the titles I might have missed at the store, I saw that one not far from the games running on the engine that's responsible for it (although now modified to noticeable extents), which I named above, along with its expansion pack.

I bought it, arrived home, and left it there on my desk for a couple of hours, not in a hurry at all (I would have had if only I knew ...). Then after a nice meal, come back to my PC, install this "probably flop but not so expensive flop" game that "I might enjoy for a while so why not giving it a try", that kinda game, which I fully expected. Oh boy I was wrong. Well, the main menu left me so-so, thinking "oh no ... not another Console-to-PC port ?!", phew ... no, it's not, however it does have such looks.

It has a mind bogglingly simple interface for a PC-only-minded game. It annoyed me a little but no biggie, I adjusted the settings and moved on, and I thought "man and the music is actually GOOD ?! because you know I think John Williams might have been irritated by the music that was made for EaW and FoC outside of the intro, and since both games run on the same basic engine and from the same developers and perhaps from the same music compositor well ... let's not expect much", but nope, the music is perhaps not Jeremy Soul-quality but it's far from being a disappointment (the music is faction-dependent AND situation-dependent too, meaning that out of combat it's more calm, atmospheric, generally speaking, and once you engage the enemy some more action/adrenaline-pumping music kicks in).

I'm very satisfied by the story as well! Another surprising element of the game. It's certainly not on the scale of complexity of The Matrix or the variety and depth of The Lord of the Rings and Star Wars or even Star Trek epic types of stories, but given its déjà-vue context as I said I thought it could have EASILY been much, much worse. Haven't we seen SO many aliens (hostile ones, or perhaps both) on Earth wanting us dead in video-games and movies and books too ? I thought "ok ... well, if it's fun then the story can hmmm ... well it can suck, who cares, if it's addictive to play". But not only is the game-play addictive but the story of the campaign so far where I am gets more interesting and even intriguing the more I progress in it.

And that story spanned three VERY unique races (uniqueness comparable to StarCraft or Warhammer 40,000 Dawn of War, and completely at the opposite of Supreme Commander which, as you guys must know, was disappointed regarding the differences, at least visually, between each factions). So when looking a the units, their buildings' architecture, their colors, animations, and the way they operate in general is all very different. It helps adding depth and credibility to the otherwise generic, fast-food story of "let's save the world once more".

And the graphics are not Company of Heroes' type, but it can easily rival and surpass (in my opinion, to some extent yes) Command & Conquer 3 and/or the likes of The Battle for Middle Earth II (which both run on the same engine by the way). If you consider that Universe at War: Earth Assault runs on a modified Star Wars: Empire at War engine, which I thought wasn't anything extra ordinary (although acceptably performing and featuring decent capabilities for its own purposes back then with EaW) then I must say that Petroglyph made quite a pretty darn good job right there optimizing it. Not only does it seem so far to be able to take more of the "lots of units at once" type of action on-screen, but the textures work has been noticeably improved, and the color palette has been increased, a very welcome addition over the repetitive browns, pale greens (mostly seen on land maps) and grays of Empire at War. Granted however, the context is different, and the main world is Earth, not an alien world, so we know that colors on Earth are abundant and diverse. And the polygons count has also apparently increased, from what I've seen so far. Those Hierarchy Walker models I think have more polygons on them alone than the total amount you'd see on-screen on a land battle skirmish in Empire at War (expect maybe for the AT-AT which was a nicely rendered model I must say).

And, another VERY surprising element about it was the A.I. I've rarely (not "never", I said rarely, I know the A.I in CoH is good too) seen any A.I in a RTS game trying to take cover dynamically as the terrain and environment changes, but I see it regularly in Universe at War (for example, those little Hierarchy scouts you'll face early in the campaign will always try to keep their distance properly, and if they meet an object on their path they will go "on the other side" and that way eliminate possible angles of fire for you). There ARE however those predictable moments where SOME (really it's not all of them) specific units will have obvious path movement-related issues, where for example going from point A to B and taking the shortest possible route to go to point B will result in moving erratically in all directions from point A as if the unit was completely out of control of itself, and then suddenly it starts to move on to point B properly. But, overall, the A.I is decent, and perhaps even good. Honestly I have rarely if ever seen decent A.I like that out of the box, in a vanilla version of a game (as far as RTS'es goes mind you), without any mods at that. Good job right there Petroglyph.

And ... well, I could go on and on about it. I'm not sure how to describe it. It's not ... it's not hmmm, maybe not a "blockbuster" title, but I when bought I thought "it might have potential, who knows, I did liked EaW for a time". I'm saying it again guys, Universe at War is a good game enough to be worth a try, if you can, but please, if not buying it do consider giving it a try you might well end up being pleasantly surprised as I've been so far.

My overall score is a solid 8.5/10, and I still haven't finished the game nor even explored everything in the skirmishes.
 

lupi

Lifer
Apr 8, 2001
32,539
260
126
I talked about it a couple times. I prefer the large scope of TA2, but the visuals, unique units and powers make this a good title. Before picking up the final version I will need to here how multiplayer matching is now as I would prefer whomever linked it with live to be shot in the head.
 

TheSlamma

Diamond Member
Sep 6, 2005
7,625
5
81
I want a multiplayer demo of it also. The Multiplayer code in the beta was awful.
 

tigersty1e

Golden Member
Dec 13, 2004
1,963
0
76
I asked about this game earlier...

Nice write-up.

This game is currently sitting on my desk and I'll give it a try.

I'm just concerned that the game won't run well on my system. I game at 1680 x 1050.

What kind framerates are you getting and at what reslution and detail?
 

Zenoth

Diamond Member
Jan 29, 2005
5,189
184
106
Originally posted by: tigersty1e
I asked about this game earlier...

Nice write-up.

This game is currently sitting on my desk and I'll give it a try.

I'm just concerned that the game won't run well on my system. I game at 1680 x 1050.

What kind framerates are you getting and at what reslution and detail?

I've set everything at maximum, without AA, but with 8xAF (forced via a profile with RivaTuner, because there is no AF options in-game), at 1280x1024 (85hz), no V-Sync. I get an average of 50 FPS or so, some times higher, some times lower, depending on what's going on.

But in a 4 Vs 4 Skirmish it goes very slow at some point, at around 25 FPS, and the units' animations along with any graphical effects are all slowed down considerably (but it's still playable). I suspect that it might be a CPU limitation (I'm not running on the system in my signature, I currently have an E6600 at stock speed along with PC2-800 RAM, 2GB, on a GA-X38-DQ6). But the frame-rate during the campaign is always high enough, there's no epic battles as big as some Skirmishes could be, at least not as far as I am in the campaign.

Overall I would say that UaW is more demanding than Empire at Wars was, even though it's the same engine.
 

Auryg

Platinum Member
Dec 28, 2003
2,377
0
71
Eh, all I've played is a skirmish so far and I'm *not* impressed. The unit designs are really cool, but there's just something about it that doesn't click. Enemies don't die quickly enough, for one. I'm not really sure what my problem with it is.

I'll have to play more and see if I can figure it out.
 

Zenoth

Diamond Member
Jan 29, 2005
5,189
184
106
Originally posted by: Auryg
Eh, all I've played is a skirmish so far and I'm *not* impressed. The unit designs are really cool, but there's just something about it that doesn't click. Enemies don't die quickly enough, for one. I'm not really sure what my problem with it is.

I'll have to play more and see if I can figure it out.

Well of course the game has its problems.

Honestly I still prefer Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War -Dark Crusade-, and I also prefer The Battle for Middle-Earth II: The Rise of the Witch King, but overall I think that UaW deserves a minimum amount of attention. It's not the best RTS I've ever played, in fact far from that. But it has its good moments. It's a solid, very decent game. To me, buying it wouldn't be a waste at all.
 

Maximilian

Lifer
Feb 8, 2004
12,603
9
81
So if i didnt really like EaW and expected better from the guys who made c&c, will i like this game?
 

tigersty1e

Golden Member
Dec 13, 2004
1,963
0
76
I just installed this game and the graphics looks really outdated.

I put everything on high and ran the first tutorial (the ones that show you the controls) no AA. I did get 60+ frames but this was with only a handful of units on the battlefield.
 
Apr 17, 2005
13,465
3
81
the previews looked interesting. man, i need to catch up on my rts games when i get a new video card. pretty much anything after warhammer, i still need to play. i'll give this one a try.
 

Zenoth

Diamond Member
Jan 29, 2005
5,189
184
106
@ Kromis

Yes, in my opinion you should like it.

@ Soviet

Most likely yes you will like it better than EaW, but keep in mind that UaW is a whole other story, in a whole other context.

For both of you, the best way to ever know would be to try it. There is a Demo out there but believe me, the Demo for UaW made me hesitate to buy it, not rush for it at the store. Only trying the final version of the game in my opinion will help you determine if it's worth actually buying.
 

coloumb

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
4,096
0
81
The demo really doesn't showcase what you'll encounter in the full version. The ONLY annoyance I have with the game is not being able to zoom out as much as I'd like to [I don't want Supreme Commander zoomability - but just a smidge so I can see more of the battlefield]. :)
 

Zenoth

Diamond Member
Jan 29, 2005
5,189
184
106
Originally posted by: coloumb
The demo really doesn't showcase what you'll encounter in the full version. The ONLY annoyance I have with the game is not being able to zoom out as much as I'd like to [I don't want Supreme Commander zoomability - but just a smidge so I can see more of the battlefield]. :)

Personally I think the zooming out is fine as is, BUT, I think this game could use a free camera movement to see everything at any desired angle, à la 3-D camera found in the Warhammer 40,000 series or Company of Heroes. Because right now the camera in UaW is about the same (or in fact the exact same) than the one found in The Battle for Middle-Earth II.

You can rotate by pressing the mouse wheel, zoom in and out a little, and that's it. All I'd want would be a 3-D, free camera (and Empire at Wars, running on the same engine, could also have used such a camera too).
 

tigersty1e

Golden Member
Dec 13, 2004
1,963
0
76
I played through the beginning of the prelude... up to the beginning part of controlling the NOvus faction.

The graphics look fairly good.. better than the tutorial. With more units on the field, it looks better.


The game seems quite complicated. But it looks promising.
 

manimal

Lifer
Mar 30, 2007
13,560
8
0
I agree with tiger, the game looked awful at first, man those cutscenes suck, but it gets a bit better when the chick in the robotech plane comes into the game, all in all its not bad, the campy nature of the dialog gives this game some charm. I played about a hour or so and will probably play it some more later tonight.
 

MmmSkyscraper

Diamond Member
Jul 6, 2004
9,475
1
76
I played the demo and wasn't impressed. It reminded me of C&C which I didn't like cos it was too basic. Both of them feel more like an arcade game than an RTS. They also share the retarded zoom problem.
 

BladeVenom

Lifer
Jun 2, 2005
13,540
16
0
Does this game use Games for Windows Live for online play? If so I'm not touching it with a 10 foot pole. GFW sucks hard, and there's no way in hell I'd ever pay for it; it isn't even worth having for free.
 

funks

Golden Member
Nov 9, 2000
1,402
44
91
Does anybody if there's a "GUARD" command at all? Have a set of units follow and guard the hero..
 

RedArmy

Platinum Member
Mar 1, 2005
2,648
0
0
Originally posted by: BladeVenom
Does this game use Games for Windows Live for online play? If so I'm not touching it with a 10 foot pole. GFW sucks hard, and there's no way in hell I'd ever pay for it; it isn't even worth having for free.

Yes it does.

Originally posted by: funks
Does anybody if there's a "GUARD" command at all? Have a set of units follow and guard the hero..

I haven't encountered a command for it. The easiest way to check is just to check out the keyboard setup under options and see if there is even a command for it, but I'm doubting it.
 

slag

Lifer
Dec 14, 2000
10,473
81
101
Installed the game--the full thing

Played through the first episode where you rescue the president.

I wont be playing any more.

This game lacks polish, enjoyment, fun, everything that the C & C series and Total Annihilation game had.

I'm going to uninstall this bloated piece of crap and not look back. I had to force myself to even finish the first episode.
 

tigersty1e

Golden Member
Dec 13, 2004
1,963
0
76
I think you can group units together..

Select all the units you want to guard the hero and select the hero and then press 1. Next time you press 1, all the units will be selected.
 

Dumac

Diamond Member
Dec 31, 2005
9,391
1
0
Originally posted by: RedArmy
Originally posted by: BladeVenom
Does this game use Games for Windows Live for online play? If so I'm not touching it with a 10 foot pole. GFW sucks hard, and there's no way in hell I'd ever pay for it; it isn't even worth having for free.

Yes it does.

I was thinking about trying this game, but nevermind. GFW can go die in a fire.